Richard Shaheen

Three appeals were heard together to determine whether the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) has jurisdiction under s. 7 of the Licence Appeal Tribunal Act to extend the two-year limitation period for filing appeals set out in s. 56 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS).

The Divisional Court held that s. 7 does grant the LAT jurisdiction to extend the s. 56 limitation period, as the time limit is fixed 'under an Act' (the Insurance Act).

The Court dismissed the insurers' appeals challenging the LAT's jurisdiction and its exercise of discretion to grant extensions, finding no errors of law.

In the third appeal, where the adjudicator had found no jurisdiction, the Court allowed the appeal and remitted the matter back to the LAT to consider the extension request.

Three appeals were scheduled to be heard regarding whether the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) has jurisdiction under s. 7 of the Licence Appeal Tribunal Act to extend the two-year limitation period for statutory accident benefits applications.

The LAT had previously made conflicting decisions on this issue and indicated it did not intend to appear.

The Divisional Court adjourned the appeals and ordered the LAT to intervene and file materials to assist the court in determining the jurisdictional issue.

The applicant sought an extension of time under section 7 of the Licence Appeal Tribunal Act to commence a proceeding for statutory accident benefits after missing the two-year limitation period.

The applicant originally filed for mediation at FSCO but failed to proceed to the Tribunal in a timely manner after the mediation was deemed failed.

The Tribunal applied the four-part test for extending time and found the applicant provided no reasonable explanation for the delay.

Furthermore, the Tribunal found the respondent would be prejudiced by the delay.

The request for an extension of time was denied and the application was dismissed.

The applicant sought an extension of time under section 7 of the Licence Appeal Tribunal Act to commence a proceeding for statutory accident benefits after missing the two-year limitation period.

The applicant initially filed for mediation at FSCO but failed to re-file with the Tribunal in a timely manner after the mediation was deemed failed.

The adjudicator applied the four-part test for extending time and found no reasonable explanation for the delay, noting that the respondent would be prejudiced by the passage of time.

The request for an extension of time was denied and the application was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought funding for a psychological assessment under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The respondent insurer denied the treatment plan based on an insurer's examination report which suggested the applicant was amplifying symptoms.

The Tribunal found the applicant's evidence, including consistent self-reported symptoms and prescriptions for antidepressants from family physicians, more compelling than the insurer's examination.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay $1,995.33 for the psychological assessment and interest on overdue amounts.

The Executive Chair reconsidered two Tribunal decisions that found the applicants' claims for statutory accident benefits were statute-barred by the two-year limitation period.

The Executive Chair found that the Tribunal made a significant error of law by failing to consider whether to grant an extension of time under s. 7 of the Licence Appeal Tribunal Act, 1999.

A rehearing was ordered to determine whether an extension of time should be granted based on the four-factor test.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, which the respondent insurer denied.

The applicant filed for mediation at FSCO, but the mediation did not take place and the file was closed.

The applicant subsequently filed an application with the Licence Appeal Tribunal after the transition of dispute resolution from FSCO to the Tribunal.

The Tribunal held that the application was statute-barred because it was filed beyond the two-year limitation period and outside the 90-day extension period following the closure of the FSCO mediation file.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, which the respondent insurer denied.

The applicant filed for mediation at FSCO, but the mediation did not take place and the file was closed.

The applicant subsequently applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The respondent argued the application was statute-barred as it was filed beyond the two-year limitation period and the 90-day extension following a failed mediation.

The Tribunal found that while the 90-day extension applied, the applicant filed his application approximately a week after the extension expired.

As the applicant failed to provide authority to extend the limitation period further, the application was dismissed as statute-barred.